Victoria to consider 5-cents-per-drink tax

Vancouver also concerned about new liquor laws and policing costs, but not planning new tax

Victoria city council will consider a five-cent drink tax to help cover the increased policing costs associated with the province’s new liquor laws, arriving in 2015.

Photograph by: EMON HASSAN
, NYT

VICTORIA — Victoria council is considering a five-cent drink tax to help cover the increased policing costs associated with new liquor laws coming in 2015.

Coun. Shellie Gudgeon said the province is benefiting financially from liquor sales “and yet they’re downloading the responsibility to the local government. I think it’s a huge issue.”

One change in the laws would allow restaurants with food-primary liquor licences to switch to liquor-primary establishments after a certain hour — essentially becoming a nightclub.

“The cost to that is just frightening,” Gudgeon said. “If every struggling restaurant in Victoria is allowed to move from food primary to liquor primary after a certain time, we’ve just become party central downtown.”

Council will also ask the province to consider increasing liquor licensing enforcement and the number of liquor inspectors, as well as transferring liquor licensing fines to the city and boosting funding for alcohol and addictions treatment.

In 2007, the Centre for Addictions Research of B.C. recommended a provincewide nickel-a-drink tax be implemented to generate an estimated $95.7 million for addictions treatment and prevention.

“The city’s position on the liquor policy changes is that they (the province) should not saddle the city with extra responsibility in terms of cost. This is a provincial change and they should take responsibility for these costs. We’ve expressed this to the province.”

Asked if Vancouver could also charge a per-drink tax to offset policing costs, Louie noted that the city applied an additional charge when the Granville entertainment area got additional service hours.

“It’s not something we’re currently contemplating,” Louie said, “but certainly somehow we need to cover these extra costs that we know will come.”

Vancouver police Const. Brian Montague said the VPD enforces the laws set out by the government. “I am not aware of the concerns Victoria has, but it would be early to speculate what effects to policing, if any, the changes may have.”

Victoria Coun. Charlayne Thornton-Joe said municipalities should get a cut of the province’s liquor profits to cover costs.

“We add more policing at night on weekends to deal with alcohol-related issues, and I think there needs to be consideration for local governments to be able to receive some of the funds that’s maybe coming in from the sale of alcohol to be able to keep their community safe,” Thornton-Joe said.

Coun. Pam Madoff agreed. “The impact it has on our policing costs is phenomenal and that message has to go back. We’re already at an unsustainable level when it comes to funding for policing, and this has the potential only to make it worse if we don’t really, really increase the inspection process.”

Madoff, Thornton-Joe and Gudgeon all said easier access to liquor is supportable only if it is tied to improvements in addiction services.

The discussion among Victoria councillors came after they heard from Douglas Scott, assistant deputy minister and general manager of the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch, on pending changes stemming from B.C.’s recent liquor policy review.

Scott said licensing changes would follow the same process as a liquor-licensing approval does now — including local government input. “Just to be clear, it’s not a blanket after 9 o’clock you can be a nightclub,” he said.

Gudgeon said the province is benefiting financially from liquor sales “and yet they’re downloading the responsibility to the local government. I think it’s a huge issue.”

Victoria councillors asked staff to report back on the idea of a per-drink levy.

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.